Is this release fee true?

[Buncey 1]

Well as the title suggests. Are we signing another player with a reidiculously low release fee compared to what we purchase him for again?I don''t know, or can''t speculate if this is true or not. Firstly Grant was pretty upset that there was a release fee in Earnshaws contract, so i doubt he''d want one in a new contract of a player he wants. Secondly, it''s a bit short sighted of the club again, and i thought they were upset about their mistakes and wanted to improve the way players are signed at the club.I don''t know if archant are more in the know about what''s going into the contract but i''d be angry and shocked if we put another release clause in a player contarct.I''m just interest what other people think and if they think that this is a load of rubbish about release clauses again?

[Grando 260]

Doesn''t the headline refer to the fact that Dave Striker currently has a release fee in his contract with the Czech club - in which case his agent has presumably told us exactly what it is so that we can do a Derby and this time use it in our favour! I don''t think it implies any detailed knowledge of any contract we might have agreed with him.

(For argument''s sake though if City do have to put a get-out clause in place hopefully a lesson will have been learnt and it will be set at least 3 or 4 times higher than the fee we actually pay for him...)

[Archie 0]

Everyone seems to have got the wrong end of the stick, he has a release clause in his current contract with the Czech club that he plays for, rumoured to be about one million euros. there is no suggestion that he has one in his contract with norwich

[First Wizard 0]

Fellas:

I''m afraid mate, it would appear to have some truth in it!

http://new.pinkun.com/content/ncfc/story.aspx?brand=PINKUNOnline&category=Norwich&tBrand=PinkUnOnline&tCategory=Norwich&itemid=NOED06%20Jul%202007%2010%3A12%3A19%3A850

It seems to be a worrying new trend with players these days. You could argue that clubs shouldn''t buy under those severe restrictions, but I guess in the real world it doesn''t happen like that.

Its frustrating for the managers and fans of clubs when that happens, as we know all too well with Earnshaw!. But as for any solution, I''m bug***ed!.[:|]

[nutty nigel 7,534]

What I think is that if a player we sign wants a relase clause and it''s reasonable it''s up the the manager to decide whether he still wants that player. I should imagine these clauses are a lot more common than people realise. Earnshaws wasn''t unreasonable IF (as I understand it) it only kicked in at the end of last season and we got a reasonable fee.

Players and their agents seem to call the shots these days and it''s throughout the game, not just at this club. I''m not saying I agree with it but there isn''t anything we can do about it.

 

[Buncey 1]

Ah. On second reading i see that you are correct. Thanks for that, saves me a lot of heart ache to know we aren''t making the same mistakes again. Thanks.

[First Wizard 0]

Okay, forget what I said, I''m a little teapot and all that!. I like a few others, read it wrong, many apologies.

But I wonder if he would insist it was in our deal with him too...........alas, we will probably never know, and maybe its best that way!

[mbncfc 1]

The players who have release clauses are one''s who want to ensure they can leave. That is the crux.

Michael Owen has one. I doubt he would''ve gone to Newcastle without it.

Earnie had one, and in negotiations clearly expressed that while we had parachute payments to push for the Premiership he would be here. But if we failed during those two seasons, he would be off. Maybe the value of the clause should''ve been higher though.

Dave the Striker has a clause probably to ensure that clubs in a comparitive rich league can release him from his contract when a healthy transfer fee is offered, which Ostrava will probably welcome too.

Player power guys, things a very different to even three years ago. Billy Sharp, Freddie Eastwood, Youssef Safri even, all appear to be having negotiations with clubs over transfers despite being contracted to a club.

That''s the way it is.

[Shack Attack 0]

[quote user="mbncfc"]

Earnie had one, and in negotiations clearly expressed that while we had parachute payments to push for the Premiership he would be here. But if we failed during those two seasons, he would be off. Maybe the value of the clause should''ve been higher though.

[/quote]

Before Earnie left there were rather a few posters who were suggesting that the only reason we bought him in the first place was due to his re-sale value and that this showed how unambitious the board were.

Now considering that we were never likely to get more that £500,000 than we paid for him due to the escape clause does this mean that our board were actually being over ambitous and obviously expected us to be in The Premiership where the clause would not have mattered?

[yellow blood 0]

On the subject of release fees...I have an inkling that Mattias Jonson had one when he was on contract to us. After our relegation, I think we got a fee in excess of £1m because of this. We certainly won on that front!

[Wings 0]

The club wouldn''t advertise a release fee on one of our players. The article actually says he has one on his current contract at his current club.